Dont buy Civ5 : Dont be the sheep

[Aeon221]

Ranged bombardment in Civ3 was imbalanced cause you could stack an INFINITE amount of deathbringers in a relatively safe tile and bombard everyone to hell.

Civ4 balanced siege a bit, but Siege STILL rule in Civ4.

Civ5 brings back the fun from Civ3 in a balanced way because of 1UPT and making Artillery risky. If the enemy gets to your artillery its bye bye. You can't protect it as easily as in civ3.

Attacking with a normal unit is a left click(select), right click(attack) and drag and release operation. Bombarding with a normal unit is a left click(select), left click(select bombard), left click(select target) operation.

So there's an additional click AND having to search through however many options for the target.

Sure, that's not a lot more than a normal unit, but that extra click (and, more importantly, the mental drain of assessing the vastly increased array of potential targets for each unit) starts to add up over time.

Which is why I'm against having archers as ranged bombardment units. They're gonna demand a shiteload of attention!

 

[seasnake]

Yes I think Civ5 has the potential to be a great game. But with 2K in the drivers seat I fear that, out of all the Civ games, Civ5 risks the same fate as ETW. I'm hoping that I am wrong and that Steams DRM won't chase to many customers away, and that 2K won't over do it with DLC civs that are too expensive for what you get, causing the community to splinter along those that can afford the DLC and those that can't.

And I especially hope that they use the Steamworks backend for good MP code and that they haven't put to few resources into the MP community. We all hear lots about the Mod Centre, but still very little detail about the actual MP mechanics other that generalist "MP will be good" statements, like they are afraid to give details like they have for the rest of the game. Anyone ever see a screenshot of the MP interface yet? Ever wonder why they would not want to show off a good thing? Makes me a tad worried, but then maybe I'm just paraniod I hope.

CS

I respect that. It may be that something will make this a bad game, and in that case thank goodness for Civ IV and modding. But I see a lot more reasons to be hopeful. I think Steam won't be what makes or breaks this game by itself. I think if they price out the customers with expensive DLC, or ruin MP, or neuter modding so you can't do interesting things like mod in Hitler or replace artwork for leaders (like the better version of Alexander that's popular) than that will kill a lot of it.

But as for the general gameplay changes to the epic game, I'm very optimistic. 1UPT, National abilities, city states, ranged attacks, zones of control, culture tree all sound highly intriguing.

 

[Grey Fox]

Attacking with a normal unit is a left click(select), right click(attack) and drag and release operation. Bombarding with a normal unit is a left click(select), left click(select bombard), left click(select target) operation.

So there's an additional click AND having to search through however many options for the target.

Sure, that's not a lot more than a normal unit, but that extra click (and, more importantly, the mental drain of assessing the vastly increased array of potential targets for each unit) starts to add up over time.

Which is why I'm against having archers as ranged bombardment units. They're gonna demand a shiteload of attention!

How do you know they haven't made an easier way to do it in Civ5?

 

[marioflag]

I'm sure the OP which has also offered himself for a protest outside Firaxis HQ and is making a clueless campaign against Steam will be the same guy which will buy a Collector's Edition on launch day or if Babylon is available only through Steam will buy the Deluxe Edition.

Why ever this person would be so much assertive in making his efforts if he wouldn't even consider to buy the game?
That's just psychology

 

[TylerD]

I'm going to buy the game because I love the series and will enjoy playing it. I couldn't give a monkeys about the publisher, their marketing, different versions of the game, Steam and it's DRM issues or anything like that because I will simply enjoy playing their game.

 

[Healz]

The thing I don't get is if they are listening to the community who requested this new Combat System for Civ V? I certainly don't recall seeing anything about any problems with the existing one. Did anyone else? Well done if you can point out to me where people were complaining about the Combat System of Civ V. Can't the complainers just get Command & Conquer? That would suit them better...

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

The thing I don't get is if they are listening to the community who requested this new Combat System for Civ V? I certainly don't recall seeing anything about any problems with the existing one. Did anyone else? Well done if you can point out to me where people were complaining about the Combat System of Civ V. Can't the complainers just get Command & Conquer? That would suit them better...

Actually Healz, people here have been complaining about stacks of doom since Civ3, & now they're finally fixing the problem-I'd call that "listening to the community"!

Aussie.

 

[CornPlanter]

I dont really see the point of this thread. I shouldn't buy Civ5 just because some person I dont know posted a rather imaginative comparison between customers and sheeps? Comparison which makes no sense whatsoever? And not a single real argument?

Yes I love Civ and I will buy Civ 5. So far every game in Civ series (= Civ1,2,3,4) and their addons were better and better. I see no reasons to believe this time will be different. Judging by what I already know about Civ5 and by the history of franchise, I am pretty sure this gonna be one awesome game.

P.S. Same stays for Blizzard. I dont play WoW or Diablo (just dont like them, not that they are bad games), but Warcraft/Starcraft RTS franchise is exceptionally good. Worth the price.

 

[StStutter]

The only thing I've seen Evrett do is post controversial articles that are clearly extremist and founded on a very small portion of the truth.

Has he actually replied to anyof the 50 arguments against his posts?

 

[bite]

Well I just pre-ordered my copy, so It looks like I'm a Sheep Baa Ram Ewe

 

[Alki]

Baaa.

 

[2K Elizabeth]

Real dialogue between two parties does not mean dialogue between one party and a third party where the second party know absolutely nothing of who is in the third party nor what positions they have. To be clear, I'm talking about real dialogue between the first and second party.

I can understand if you want to settle on us being happy with the fact there are representatives of the community who are involved in the feedback process and so forth, but it's simply ridiculous to call this "real dialogue with the community". Better to call it simply what it is - real dialogue with the playtesters.

Dialogue implies conversation. 2K are talking to us (thank you for doing so, by the way) but they are not talking with us.

And if there was one person I think Firaxis should be having real dialogue with, it would be jdog, but he's obviously not under a NDA.

By the way, I still have faith in Shafer not to ship a bad game. If he insisted on it being Jon Shafer's Civilization V, that would probably be enough for me.

I think this is a valid point - if you guys feel like you aren't involved enough in the conversation, let me or Greg know and we'll work on that for you. I know we're already working on getting Q&As and articles together for some of the topics people have mentioned, but they aren't live yet - but if there's something in particular you want to see, speak up so we don't miss it.

 

[Commander Bello]

I think this is a valid point - if you guys feel like you aren't involved enough in the conversation, let me or Greg know and we'll work on that for you. I know we're already working on getting Q&As and articles together for some of the topics people have mentioned, but they aren't live yet - but if there's something in particular you want to see, speak up so we don't miss it.

Oh, dear Elizabeth, please give us a break, will you?

It has been pointed out to Greg what we are missing - in other words, we are missing answers to the questions which have been risen over and over again.

I don't know if it has been Greg's lonely decision to wait until each single question can be fully answered, not bearing the risk of anything to change until release, or if it is the decision of your company.
What I know is that the majority of questioners seems to like to have answers as soon as possible (aka within a reasonable timeframe) - being well aware that some questions indeed may take longer to be answered.

Yet, not given any answers at all is regarded as not being satisfying.

So, thanks for the repeated invitation to contact you - but we did. It can be read in the respective thread.
It would be nice to get some kind of reaction, though.

 

[azzaman333]

Oh, dear Elizabeth, please give us a break, will you?

It has been pointed out to Greg what we are missing - in other words, we are missing answers to the questions which have been risen over and over again.

I don't know if it has been Greg's lonely decision to wait until each single question can be fully answered, not bearing the risk of anything to change until release, or if it is the decision of your company.
What I know is that the majority of questioners seems to like to have answers as soon as possible (aka within a reasonable timeframe) - being well aware that some questions indeed may take longer to be answered.

Yet, not given any answers at all is regarded as not being satisfying.

So, thanks for the repeated invitation to contact you - but we did. It can be read in the respective thread.
It would be nice to get some kind of reaction, though.

There's probably a reason why your questions in particular aren't being answered, but I don't think I can elaborate without breaking forum rules.

 

[StStutter]

Azzaman, I thought rules don't stop you

 

[azzaman333]

Azzaman, I thought rules don't stop you

I'm trying to be good at the moment.

 

[ori]

Moderator Action: Keep it civil - and that does include refraining from trolling.

 

[AlpsStranger]

@2K Elizabeth: Start inundating us with information. It is the best way to overshadow cranks like Evrett and Bello. Flag it all as tentative to cover your ass, but every bit of info we don't have is displaced by this kind of nonsense.

Moderator Action: And there I went and asked for civil behavior... Warned for Trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[2K Elizabeth]

Oh, dear Elizabeth, please give us a break, will you?

It has been pointed out to Greg what we are missing - in other words, we are missing answers to the questions which have been risen over and over again.

I don't know if it has been Greg's lonely decision to wait until each single question can be fully answered, not bearing the risk of anything to change until release, or if it is the decision of your company.
What I know is that the majority of questioners seems to like to have answers as soon as possible (aka within a reasonable timeframe) - being well aware that some questions indeed may take longer to be answered.

Yet, not given any answers at all is regarded as not being satisfying.

So, thanks for the repeated invitation to contact you - but we did. It can be read in the respective thread.
It would be nice to get some kind of reaction, though.

The Steam FAQ is still being worked on - I know that you guys wanted that earlier. However, beyond that, if you want to know something specific let me know so we can try and fit it into the schedule. I'm not Greg, so anything you told him I won't know.

 

[nerd]

@2K Elizabeth: Start inundating us with information. It is the best way to overshadow cranks like Evrett and Bello. Flag it all as tentative to cover your ass, but every bit of info we don't have is displaced by this kind of nonsense.

Moderator Action: And there I went and asked for civil behavior... Warned for Trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

It is sometimes difficult to remain civil when it seems that two people are talking in different rooms.
I give 2K Elizabeth slack here, because she appears to have handed off this forum to Greg, and maynot have kept aware of how few posts Greg has made, or how little content those he made contained.
Having said that, It seems to me that the umbrage given to Elizabeth may be justified, as she should have read over the last few weeks of the thread to bring herself up to speed. Her comments seem to indicate she did not, and if so, well, Elizabeth (rhetoric questions) do Greg's postings seem to answer the valid questions asked here? Has he adequately interacted with this forum to explain what he could, In short, has he helped or has his appearance of stonewalling exacerbated the frustration of not getting answers.
I leave those questions with you.
I think this honest questioning of Greg's actions is needed.